Design a site like this with
Get started

Sequester Shenanigans, and the Demise of the GOP

The “sequester” debate continues, as the selfish, snorting beasts in Washington refuse to make any substantial cuts, and the debate will end with the usual Democrats getting their way and Republicans caving (which most of them were planning to do anyway). The squealing trough-feeders will once again raise taxes, and this will be on top of the other taxes that were raised on January 1st, and the ObamaCare taxes that will cause further unemployment.

Not only are those clowns in Washington selfish and clinging to their extravagant lifestyle but they are clueless to the fact that their continual kicking the can down the road will at some point totally remove the actual producers from society, from whose labor and savings these vampires suck and suck and suck (and suck).

Many talk shows and pundits seem to have a general consensus that the Republican Party is more or less doomed, and there really isn’t much they can do to save themselves. The sheeple continue to vote for socialist Republicans in charge such as John Boehner, Paul Ryan, and Lindsey Graham, and, as I’ve noted here many times now, we really do have one-party rule in Amerika.

Well, these clueless Republicans have really done it to themselves, especially during the most recent Presidential campaign, in their snubbing, booing, ostracizing, banishing, misrepresenting, and attempting to silence Ron Paul. No, not one of the dumb GOP socialists — Romney, Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, Perry, et al. — could have beaten Obama. But in match-up polls during the primaries, only Ron Paul could have beaten Obama.

Ron Paul was the only Republican in Congress, and certainly the only GOP Presidential candidate, who understood that this whole central planning thing in Washington just isn’t working. Dr. Paul would’ve eliminated most of the cabinet-level departments and most federal agencies which are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution. Paul also recognizes that foreign interventionism backfires and begets more interventionism by the clueless statists in Washington, and that is why we need to end U.S. government foreign interventionism entirely.

Dr. Paul also understands monetary policy, dollar hegemony, and the differences between monetary central planning and free banking/sound money.

Unfortunately, most Republicans are as much statists as Democrats, and they love central planning. Most of them are authoritarian in their mentality and have an automatic knee-jerk interventionism mindset.

In the foreign policy category, John McCain went on and on and on about the Benghazi fiasco and how our government diplomats and forces should have done more to prevent the murders of the four Americans there, and Rand Paul questioned Hillary Clinton extensively. But no one on the panel bothered to even ask why our government, diplomatic and military people are even over there in those parts of the world!

That question just didn’t even occur to them. They are statists and “exceptionalists” who take it as a given that our government must have a presence in all those other parts of the world, even though that is not authorized by the Constitution, and history has shown that these foreign intrusions by U.S. government agents and forces do nothing but provoke foreigners to act against Americans and other Westerners, and create blowback.

But because of their ignorance, authoritarianism, nationalism and moral relativism (“booing” the Golden Rule), they are wasting so much time and energy analyzing and trying to find remedies for these policies of interventionist intrusions that shouldn’t be going on in the first place.

And these statists, R and D, are truly covetous, it’s no longer a surprise to see how selfish and clinging they are. Their passion for coveting foreign lands and resources is as much as it is for the private wealth and property, and lives, of their fellow Americans. You know, the sheeple who vote for these criminals and whose hard labor the criminals benefit from. Yeah, those fellow Americans. Very covetous are they. And I say “sheeple” because, as Robert Wenzel pointed out, most Americans are clueless about the need to get rid of central planning, or even to make very big cuts in the federal budget — in fact, many of the sheeple want to increase government spending!

So, in the sequester debate, many of these same Republicans whose campaign rhetoric consists of “cutting spending,” “cut taxes,” and — get this — “free markets” (barf!) are not willing to cut anything substantial from the trillions-dollars federal budget. Certainly not from the merchants of death of the military-security-congressional-industrial complex.

For example, Robert Wenzel has this post about Rand Paul not wanting to lay off federal employees, and instead the younger Paul submits a plan to make government more efficient. Just recently, I posted a link to Murray Rothbard’s article, The Myth of Efficient Government Service. Rothbard makes point after point to show how inefficiency is inherent in government monopolies and “services.”

In addition to government and central planning’s inherent inefficiencies, there is the tyranny aspect to Big Government Leviathan that we have now, and it’s still growing. In Wenzel’s post, he notes, “Government cuts shouldn’t be about attempting to prevent havoc and chaos, they should be about creating havoc and chaos, so that the people are freed from the junior tyrants in all these agencies.”

So, if we were to follow the elder Paul’s plan (had the rest of the GOP Establishment not pushed him away like the snarling, insufferable little brats that they are), whole departments, agencies, bureaus and other intruders would be given the heave-ho, and not only would that save the American people a lot of money, but a lot of anguish as well, as at least a little bit of their liberty would be restored — a little less fear of some sniveling government hack coming to their door or into their businesses to harass, intimidate and threaten them.

There are other parts of government that should be given the heave-ho as well, totally unnecessary intrusions that are loved by total control freaks, social engineering fanatics and extreme nationalists, and I am not referring to the “Left.” I am getting very tired of hearing these Republicans and conservatives, and their thumb-sucking talk radio defenders, go on about what “control freaks” Democrats and progressives are, when these very conservatives are the fat pots calling the kettles black.

The Left and progressives are control freaks when it comes to guns, but really private ownership of guns. We know that deep down these ignoramuses are very authoritarian in nature, and they have no problem with a heavily armed police state, from local police to military. But the conservatives have their own control freak issues. (See my article on the similarities between the neocons and the progressives.)

But one issue I have in mind is the immigration issue. I have written about that here and here. Sadly, many conservatives and nationalists believe that central planners in Washington should have complete control over who migrates into this territory and who doesn’t. That should not be the decision of government bureaucrats, but of private people moving about freely, establishing contracts and engaging in free commerce and trade. In this issue, conservatives are the “control freaks.” They certainly don’t believe in “free markets” here, not in the least.

And the other issue of conservative control freakishness is the “same-sex marriage” issue. As I noted in my article The Right to Marry, all human beings have a right to marry, and it’s no one else’s business. Only real control freaks want to assume ownership over other people’s lives, relationships and marriages.

And it is also in immigration in which the statist conservatives show covetous usurping of ownership over other people’s lives. But most Americans in general have this nationalistic covetousness, in my view. They actually value the idea of “citizenship,” in which we really are owned by the government. That is what “being a citizen of America” really means, being the property of the government. (See Carl Watner on that.)

And in addition to the Republicans and conservatives’ inability to understand “fiscal conservatism,” and unwillingness to make meaningful cuts (being the covetous, squealing socialist hogs that they are), those two issues, immigration and “gay marriage,” will also aid in the demise of the GOP. (And why the Republicans and conservatives worship the awful “Honest Abe,” I’ll never know.) Good riddance to bad … well, you know.

If this seems like just a rant against Republicans and conservatives, well, I suppose so. But the Democrats are even worse, and, as Thomas DiLorenzo writes about the “Washington Monument Syndrome,” the Democrats in control will whine and threaten the people until they get their way. They’re all babies combined with being criminals down there in that terrible place. How the hell could Ron Paul have stood being there for the decades he was there?

So anyway, as the U.S. is becoming like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, as I have stated many times here, it looks like it will take major economic collapse and worse for the people to learn why central planning is a bad idea and we need to get rid of it, and decentralize and desocialize.  In 2007, Lew Rockwell offered a very good “Thirty-Day Plan” to dismantle the federal Leviathan that has done nothing but wreak havoc on the people. Here are my favorite parts:

…DAY THREE: The federal government sells all its land, freeing up tens of millions of acres for development, mining, farming, forestry, oil drilling, private parks, etc. The government uses the revenue to pay off the national debt and other liabilities.

DAY FOUR: The minimum wage is reduced to zero, creating jobs for ex-federal bureaucrats at their market wage. All pro-union laws and regulations are scrapped. The jobless rate falls dramatically….

….DAY SIX: The Department of Commerce is abolished. Big business has to make its own way in the world, without subsidies and privileges at the expense of its competitors and customers.

DAY SEVEN: The plug is pulled on the Department of Energy. Oil and gas prices plummet.

DAY EIGHT: All regulatory agencies, from the Interstate Commerce Commission to the Federal Trade Commission, are deep-sixed. Competition is legalized….

DAY TWELVE: The Federal Reserve closes its open-market operations and stops protecting the banking industry from competition. But banks can now engage in all the non-bank financial activities previously forbidden to them. The business cycle, which is caused by monetary expansion through the credit markets, is liquidated.

DAY THIRTEEN: Federal deposit insurance is scrapped. All insured deposits are redeemed from federal assets, which include the personal assets of high-level government employees. The threat of bank runs forces banks to keep 100% reserves for their demand deposits, and prudent reserves on all other accounts. There are no more inherently bankrupt banks propped up by the government, at taxpayer expense, and no more bail-outs….

….DAY EIGHTEEN: The Justice Department shutters its anti-trust division. Companies, big and small, are free to merge – up, down, or sideways. Stockholders can buy any other company, or sell their stock to anyone else. Marginal producers can no longer battle their competitors with bureaucratic weapons.

DAY NINETEEN: The Department of Education flunks the constitutionality test, and is kicked out. Private charities set up remedial reading and writing programs for the former bureaucrats. Federally subsidized sex education and other anti-family programs go out of business. Local school districts become responsive to parents or close, pressured by a fast-growing private school sector (which many more parents can now afford)….

DAY TWENTY-SIX: Porno artists have to earn their own livings, as the National Endowment for the Arts tries to raise its budget through sidewalk painting sales.

DAY TWENTY-SEVEN: Foreign aid is outlawed as unconstitutional, unjust, and un-economic. Foreign politicians have to steal their own money. The World Bank, IMF, and United Nations close their super-luxurious doors….

No More Police Socialism

February 22, 2013

Copyright © 2013 by (Link to article)

Murray Rothbard’s book, Power and Market, contains a section that promotes a free-market in defense and is republished on LRC, titled, No More Military Socialism.

I’m no Murray Rothbard of course, but I would like to submit a variation on that theme: No More Police Socialism. It is increasingly frustrating that our society continues to support such a scheme, despite its incompetence, its criminality and its horrors.

As I have stated here several times now, there really is no legitimate need to allow a government to monopolize community policing and security.

For those who want a thorough overview of what police socialism is, please check out this terrific article by Anthony Gregory.

But my article here is not intended to provide economic differences between police socialism and free markets, just to present a general case for abolishing the self-serving government police monopoly.

So the way I see it, theoretically, police or “law enforcement” socialism is when government bureaucrats possess the ownership of the means of production and provision of community policing and security while outlawing (at least implicitly) any competing agencies to do the same.

But a more honest assessment of police socialism is this: The people of a community already possess or could possess the means of providing their own security themselves. Those interested in doing so already have the natural right to establish private policing firms or voluntary groups and have a right to possess whatever armaments they wish to carry out such endeavors.

But in the current situation of police socialism, government bureaucrats have stolen from the people their ability to provide their own security, by making such attempts artificially unlawful and through disarmament schemes weakening the people’s abilities to physically defend and protect themselves when their lives and property are threatened.

The government bureaucrats have usurped and forcibly monopolized the means of production in security provision at the people’s expense. That, in a nutshell, is what police socialism is.

So what do these bureaucrats and monopolists do with their monopoly power, enforce the law?

Well, they enforce the thousands and thousands of made-up laws on the books which make artificial criminals of totally innocent human beings, that’s for sure.

Okay, but is such a government-monopolized system efficient? I’ll bet Murray Rothbard would answer in the negative.

Do the government police protect people from the aggressions of others? (Hmmm. I hear snickering out there.)

As CopBlock’s Peter Eyre noted recently, the government police have no legal obligation to protect anyone.

So why the hell do they exist?

Does anyone have a good answer to that question?

And this police socialism is coinciding with the outright fascism that our Rulers are shoving down our throats, with their gun registration/confiscations/banning, and other State intrusions and violations of the people’s rights.

For thorough discussions on socialism and fascism, please see Ludwig von Mises (or read the book here) and Ben O’Neill respectively.

As I wrote recently, the hysterical Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick presented his new gun control measures in January, and signed into law the mandatory collection of fingerprints of school teachers and others who might directly deal with children, including prospective adoptive parents.

Then, during the recent Blizzard of 2013, the fascist Gov. Patrick gave an executive order outlawing driving on all roads in Massachusetts, or risk a heavy fine and/or one year in jail! Can you believe these “liberals”?

During the 1980s, then-Massachusetts Gov. Michael Stanley Dukakis had many photo-ops while standing around with his loyal police storm troopers. Dukakis and his fellow socialist/fascists were obsessed with ordering people to wear their seatbelt or face heavy fines.

The truth is, a lot of these police-state driving laws such as mandatory seatbelts are nothing more than revenue-enhancements for the State. It’s never enough revenue for them, and never enough bureaucrats and administrators to feed off the fees, fines and taxes.

And it’s never enough artificial power and authority to give to uniformed, badged and armed goons.

However, contrary to what the fascists and socialists believe, all human beings have an inalienable right to freedom of movement and to travel freely, and a right to self-defense. This is part of our more general right to life and liberty, to self-ownership, and to be free from the initiation of aggression by others.

Never mind all that, our Rulers say. They own the rest of us. And the Rulers seem to have this pathological compulsion to control our every movement now, with tracking and monitoring and surveillance cameras, and mandatory seatbelts or banning driving altogether, fingerprinting, registering firearms, and so on and so forth.

Alas, these “liberal” politicians just love to have control, they love the police state, for that is what socialism is all about. Our current socialist system of government monopoly in community policing and security naturally develops into a police state, and that is what we have now.

In California recently, out-of-control, “we’re really looking out for ourselves, not you lowly commoners” police goons were in a frantic search and destroy of an alleged “cop killer.”

In their hysterical fear that “one of their own” had turned against them and may be giving them a taste of their own medicine – of what government police all across America have been criminally dishing out to innocent people on a daily basis – these possibly steroid-laden Barney Fifes and Rambos shot up two different vehicles and injured innocent people, without having the patience to actually confirm whether or not their victims were the actual suspect.

William Grigg very articulately and thoroughly described in this interview the whole story of the cops’ criminally self-centered craziness, and how their actions were similar to Janet Reno’s Waco fiasco.

Another example of what police socialism gives us was last year when the Aurora, Colorado police ordered many people out of their cars stopped at an intersection, handcuffed all of them and searched their cars, based on a tip that a robbery suspect was among them.

Sadly, the general intelligence level of our “men in blue” has not been up to snuff in recent years. (Of course, when police forces are intentionally hiring applicants with lower IQs, then we might be asking for trouble. And the government schools are no help, as most of us already know.)

So God forbid we should require government police officers to read and understand the ideas of presumption of innocence and due process.

And God forbid we should require prudence, patience and rationality. Instead, rather than think things through when the times call for that, the unthinking short-sightedness inherent in socialism rules the day, and we get disaster and criminality.

Our short-sighted, immediate-gratification society of unthinking self-centeredness also pervades the category of public office-holders. The rise to the top of our Rulers is based not on moral character, intelligence or understanding of the rule of law, but based on rhetorical and demagogical abilities. Obviously, this trend has gotten much worse since Hayek wrote his Road to Serfdom nearly 70 years ago.

Some of the reasons why today’s “liberal” intellectuals defend the socialist police state and our criminal rulers such as the Drone-Murderer-in-Chief can be found in Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s article, Natural Elites, Intellectuals, and the State.

So we see the collectivism, extreme self-centeredness and pathological camaraderie of those California goons, as their blind obsession to find the “cop-killer” probably wouldn’t have been such an obsession had the suspect been just an ordinary civilian-killer.

Just as the ruling bureaucrats become addicted to their non-accountable monopoly powers, their controls over the population and their tax-funded free money and free stuff, so too do the government police become addicted to the power, control and artificial authority to stop, search, arrest and detain, bully and order around innocent civilians.

This increasing violence – institutionalized by the ruling bureaucrats – against innocent civilians, taxpayers, businesspeople, travelers, drivers, students or protesters, breeds the very kind of criminal behaviors which L.A. ex-cop Christopher Dorner was trying to expose, before he allegedly killed four people.

For decades, as the American culture has continually degraded, the socialist monopoly schemes have also degraded, which I believe is inherent in socialism, and the socialist government police scheme has also developed into a sick culture of violence.

But the government police have also fallen victim to a largely self-imposed dangerousness to their jobs, by willingly becoming a part of enforcing stupid and counter-productive laws such as those of the Establishment’s drug war, and acting as tax/fine robbers collectors for the State.

So, while the non-government individual civilian should stand up for oneself and one’s rights, so should these government police stand up for themselves, stand up to the dumb government bureaucrats who are making all these laws, not just drug-related, but thousands of other useless and intrusive laws, that these government cops are made to enforce.

Such fascism combined with the overall socialist system has turned America into a very undesirable, authoritarian and dangerous society. Uniformed, badged and armed government police order the people around, intimidate and threaten, unlawfully arrest and detain, taser and murder innocent civilians, and they get away with it with impunity.

This outright criminality is institutionalized by socialism. When you let a government monopolize the community’s policing and security and restrict the people’s rights to self-protection and defense, and when you do not require the armed agents of the State to act under the rule of law, what do you think this will lead to? A peaceful society? A secure civilian population?

And those “law-and-order” conservatives out there – those “anti-socialism” conservatives – this is the socialism they love, because most of them seem to be brainwashed their whole lives to love and worship armed, uniformed authority, no matter how bad it is or how criminally its agents act.

Speaking of our culture of violence, PBS recently did a story on violent video games and their effects on people, especially the younger generation.

Violent video games, movies and TV shows can contribute to the desensitizing of the humanity of others, of the victims of violence. What is worrisome is that many of the younger government police agents may be influenced by the kind of aggression that is promoted in those games.

But along with the increasing militarization of America’s government police forces, the federal Department of Homeland Security’s purchases of hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition, and Obama and Congress’s campaign to disarm the American people, also worrisome is that the DHS and Department of Defense have been engaging in desensitization exercises. And worse, the police bureaucracy has been preparing to desensitize their goons toward firing upon civilians who attempt to defend themselves!

Unfortunately, many people actually believe that it is treasonous to disobey the authority of government bureaucrats and their minions (or who promote state secession from the United States).

But the opposite is true: Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort…” This is also referring to the agents of the federal government who would wage a war against the states or against the people of the states.

Yes, Obama martial law criminality and “civil unrest” may be coming to Amerika.

So, in such circumstances, I wonder if the officers of local government police would aid and abet such federal criminality and treason, or would such government police take the side of the people?

In either case, these circumstances are the very reason why the early Americans wrote the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Conclusion: Abolishing the socialist government police (and national security socialism, too) and promoting a natural order rule of law would make America a much safer and more civilized society, that’s for sure.

Killer Pharma vs. Healthy Nutrition

Here is an article by Ira Katz, whose brother died recently. The possible cause of death, if I’m reading this correctly, is a prescription pharmaceutical drug(s). There are many of Big Pharma’s victims all over America, and that is unfortunate. One aspect of this story is a fear of the government and the police. Should this Big Pharma-government corporatism and fear of police really be happening in America?

I think the answer to these kinds of situations is to not take any psychopharmaceutical drugs in the first place. (And other pharmaceuticals as well.)

As an alternative to the pharmaceuticals, nutritional medicines and supplements tend to be less risky, and are probably healthier. Here is an article by Donald Miller, MD from two years ago, describing the various nutritional supplements available. And here is an interview of Dr. Miller by Lew Rockwell on the “State-Pharma Complex,” ObamaCare, and other important issues.

Most Americans No Longer Believe in the Rule of Law

Glenn Greenwald has one of the best articles I’ve seen analyzing, critiquing  and castigating the idea of “American Exceptionalism,” that the U.S. may be above the law, but other countries may not. However, to really make the article complete, he should’ve at least mentioned Ron Paul, who was the only candidate for President in 2012 to discuss these ideas, and the only one to assert that the U.S. government must follow the rule of law, as we would expect other governments to follow.

Government Goons in California Further Prove Hoppe Right

I didn’t watch the State of the Onion last night, because I don’t watch TV. I could’ve listened to it on the radio, but I was already in bed by then. Call me an old fuddy-duddy stick-in-the-mud, whatever. Why would I want to hear that crap anyway? To hear those criminals cheer each other and cheer Obomber makes me want to toss my cookies. Oh, well.

So there has been this story of the ex-L.A. cop who allegedly murdered several people including another cop. I have linked to several articles noting the frenzy of the fraidy cats of the various California police agencies. Yes, they are always looking out for themselves, that’s for sure. And a lot of what we’ve been hearing now seems less and less believable, especially now that we are hearing of the media helping the police to cover up their actions, actions which apparently have been to take a vengeful street justice approach in reaction to a “cop killer.”

But these neanderthals are merely taking after their beloved President who opposes due process as well, and believes that government agents such as he, and the police or military, should have the legal authority to murder innocent people who are accused of crimes whether or not the accusations have been proven with evidence presented against the accused.

But the State is in its dying days now, at least here in Amerika. The State is taking itself down in its agents’ rush to gratify their selfish desires at the expense of others, not just in terms of material wealth but in terms of power exercised over their unwitting, weaker or disarmed victims.

Jeffrey Tucker has this article on The Four Signs of a Collapsing State. Among other things, Tucker writes:

Thirty years ago, the police were not militarized, the courts were not clogged to the point of being useless, the jails were not full to capacity, and there was a sense that the system was flawed but essentially workable. That is no longer true.

After 9-11, the state overreached and militarized the entire security system in this country, thereby exposing its essential nature. More and more people are catching on to the reality that the security system is not there to protect us but rather to protect the state itself from us.

As I have mentioned just recently.

While the book Tucker refers to is Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, I think that THE book to read on how democracies are destined to fail and crash is Hoppe’s Democracy: The God That Failed.

Good Posts Analyzing the Obama Excuse-to-Murder-Innocents Memo; Plus, Suggestions for an Alternative

Marcy Wheeler has these posts on the more specific aspects of the recently publicized memo regarding Obama’s murder program.

Is One of the Anwar al-Awlaki Memos a Revised Imminence Standard?

Article II or AUMF? “A High Level Official” (AKA John Brennan) Says CIA Can Murder You

They Knew the Evidence against Anwar al-Awlaki Was Weak When They Killed Him

I think that analyzing the specifics can be important, and I suppose that, as long as we are forced to live in this system of government monopoly over “national security,” and given that the people have stupidly handed control over their security to the lowest common denominator amongst the population, then it is good to engage in some slicing and dicing of a fascist government executive’s illicit murder program, to protect ourselves (and foreign people) from being its future victims.

However, my being a realist includes the acceptance that no amount of “oversight” or “reforms” really will protect us from being future victims of Leviathan’s reckless violence, as long as we keep the system of monopoly and centralization in place. As long as a population gives monopoly power to stupid, non-productive bureaucrats, it is destined to become a dictatorship, and just another tyranny, like Nazi Germany, North Korea, and the Soviet Union.

Just look at all the articles I have now in my USSA Amerika page. The U.S. isn’t quickly becoming another totalitarian tyranny?

For those who really believe that we should keep the current system of socialized, corporatist, central planning in “national security” in place, I have a bridge to sell you.

But for those interested in alternative to the statist quo, here are some informative articles:

Gustave de Molinari: The Production of Security

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Reflections on State and War

Morris and Linda Tanehill: Foreign Aggression

Murray Rothbard: War, Peace, and the State

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: The Private Production of Defense [.pdf]

Murray Rothbard: War and Foreign Policy

Robert Higgs: The Living Reality of Military-Economic Fascism

Murray Rothbard: No More Military Socialism

The Washington Post Series, Top Secret America, (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: The Myth of National Defense [.pdf]

Hans-Hermann Hoppe: On the Impossibility of Limited Government

Robert Murphy: Production and the Market for Security (Audio)

Murray Rothbard: War Guilt in the Middle East

My Thoughts on a President’s Self-Proclaimed Authority to Murder Innocent Human Beings

Here is a very telling interview from PBS that I heard rebroadcast on WGBH radio last night, regarding the recently leaked memo that described the Obama Administration’s legal reasoning for giving the President the power to murder innocent people without due process.

You can hear the ACLU representative clearly articulate the very serious implications of the U.S. government’s murder-of-innocents policy, while the Columbia law professor — who is also a fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations (!) — expresses a very inarticulate, lame case for the government to have this kind of immoral, dangerous power. The Columbia law professor is stuttering and stammering because he knows that his defense of this police state is entirely immoral and criminal. They enter at about 4 minutes in the video.

And shame on all those bureaucrat-groupies in the media out there who for over 11 years have been obedient stenographers helping to rationalize the State’s Orwellian war on peace and freedom, a.k.a. the “War on Terror.”

Whether the totalitarians and their gullible, obedient defenders like it or not, all human beings have a natural human right to presumption of innocence and due process. If someone is going to accuse you of something, then you have a right to require that individual to show evidence against you. If the accuser can’t or won’t provide evidence against you the accused, then you are still innocent, and any harm the accuser inflicts on you is a criminal action.

No exceptions. No “secret” or “classified” stuff, no “But there’s a war going on,” is important enough to allow anyone to have the power to be judge, jury and executioner. (Maybe in a third-world banana republic, maybe.)

There are those who want to say that the “War on Terror” is different, and that in this case we must make exceptions. No, sorry.

There are those who believe that this war is not what our government has been telling us it is (although, if that were true, we certainly wouldn’t know that given the submissive beltway news media today), and some people believe that the “War on Terror” is really a hoax, and that the whole thing is illegitimate.

I know, there are many chickenhawks, many un-American ignorant politicians who love the government but hate the moral values and principles of freedom upon which America was founded, I know. They want to arrest, detain indefinitely or murder those who question the legitimacy of this illegitimate “War on Terror.” But it is they who become the real terrorists when they support or implement a policy of murdering anyone anywhere that the President or some other bureaucrat decides should be murdered, without showing evidence, without letting the accused see the evidence and challenge it, without giving the State’s victim the right to defend oneself against the accusations.

Criticizing U.S. government foreign policy, by the way, was exactly why Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was murdered by Obama. Obama’s action was nothing but murder and a violation of the victim’s right to life, but Obama’s rationalization was to silence a critic, a violation of the victim’s First Amendment-protected right to criticize obviously bad and immoral policies.

And the so-called “conservatives” who preach about “Christian moral values” have been taking the side of the corrupt State against Christian moral values, and shame on them.

In fact, this whole police state since 9/11 was planned well before 9/11. We have had people in power who just love power, who love a police state and with them at the controls. They love it. Just look at the idiots who were grilling former Sen. Chuck Hagel, the nominee for Secretary of Defense. And when they question John Brennan, Obama’s nominee for CIA Director, watch the senators act like little puppy dogs as they jump up and down Brennan’s leg and lick his face. They know what power the next CIA Director will have, given that Obama will turn the “War on Terror” more within U.S. borders. (See this must-read Arthur Silber article on the psychopathic John Brennan.)

Do you really believe that this State-sponsored, State-perpetrated terror and murder program will be reserved for only foreign territories? Reckless, immoral Obama and his CIA drones have been killing countless innocent civilians [.pdf] in Pakistan and other countries for years now. He is bombing villages, wedding parties, funerals, even rescuers of victims of the drones. Those entirely innocent human beings are terrorized by Obama’s drone-murder bombings.

For those who are chortling and saying that old phrase, “It can’t happen here,” in June of 2010 I wrote an article, Tea Partiers May Need the ACLU Soon. After 9/11, once then-President George W. Bush started two unnecessary and counter-productive wars, and especially put all the due process-trashing policies in place, and Obama strengthened and escalated the policies, our totalitarian future was perfectly clear.

I hate to say “I told you so.” Currently, the John Boehner Establishment elitists have been throwing the Tea Party congressmen off committees, really snubbing and trashing those people. The John Boehner Establishment elitists join the Left and the Obama communists Weather Undergrounders Administration in the elitists’ silencing and banishing of the Tea Party people.

There is little difference between the neocons such as the Bushes and other warmongers and warvangelicals, and the Obama lefty moonbats and communists.

And in March of 2010 I wrote an article, November 2010: More Rearranging of Deck Chairs. But I hate to say “I told you so.”

Now, as much as I don’t like the U.S. Constitution, and as flawed as the Bill of Goods Rights is, most of the early Americans who wrote those documents understood from experience that all human beings have a right to presumption of innocence and due process. It doesn’t matter who is accusing you of something, whether it is your spouse, your neighbor, or the President of the United States. In a just, moral, and civilized society, the accuser must be required to present evidence against the accused and prove the allegations, and the accused has a right to defend oneself against accusations. Otherwise, we are giving these bureaucrats the power to merely snuff out those they don’t like or whose existence is an inconvenience to them.

And, like it or not (all you “liberals” out there!), these government bureaucrats’ assertions without evidence that presumably innocent human beings are “terrorists,” or “criminals” without the targeted people being allowed to defend themselves is one of the main reasons why the Second Amendment was written — to protect ourselves from the aggressions of the State.

I think that a lot of people are in denial when they say that “It can’t happen here.”

Dismantle the Totalitarian Monster and Take Control Over Your Own Lives

February 4, 2013

Copyright © 2013 by (Link to article)

In recent months some people have said that my writing has seemed “depressing,” “angry,” “sarcastic,” “vitriolic,” etc. I know. But I’m a realist, and it’s not easy for me to just look the other way when I see trouble, sense danger, or smell a rat.

Unfortunately in today’s modern, supposedly advanced society, there are just too many rats to keep track of.

But mostly, a lot of my writing is out of fear, and that’s because of the direction our society has taken in recent decades.

Each day the police state, the surveillance state, and the bankrupting trough-gorging and selfishness among government bureaucrats escalates. How can you look the other way?

Actually, a lot of people are in denial of the gradual breakdown and collapse of society, because it really is horrifying, and I don’t blame them.

We have the selfish private-wealth coveters in Washington – Republican and Democrat, conservatives and liberals, socialists and libertarians – conjuring up schemes on a daily basis on how to steal more from the people, how to further benefit from the public trough. The most selfish, covetous people in our society are located in Washington, D.C. and surrounding suburbs, in my opinion.

Many people are in denial of this, of what kinds of people those with government-tentacles really are.

And the people are also in denial of the inherent recklessness and ruination of government-monopoly, centralization and central planning.

It doesn’t work. That is, our current system of central planning was doomed to failure from the get-go.

I have tried in many past articles to explain this, but it seems that the only response is … crickets.

The system of government centralization and monopoly can’t and won’t work. When you give bureaucrats the power to order you to only use the one government-issued currency (legal tender laws), and give monetary central planners control over a centralized monetary system and banking cartel, you are giving these people the message: “Please, please cause inflation and unemployment, please put people out of work, please take my hard-earned money and my savings, please enslave me, I beg of you!”

Okay, enough of that.

But we did have Ron Paul, who tried to get the word out, and I know he continues to do so. Unfortunately his suggestions to abolish the Fed, the SEC, DEA, the FBI and CIA, DHS and TSA, the Departments of Education and Energy (and, one hopes, the FDA and HHS as well) and others, fell on deaf ears. More crickets.

Most people just do not want to know the truth about those central planning revolving-door crony schemers and shysters, and the agencies and bureaus they have been given with which to trespass into the lives, homes, businesses and bodies of innocent people.

And the gullible population really believes these fiefdoms-for-non-productive-busybodies are necessary – or, a “necessary evil.”

Barf. Me. Out.

Sorry. And now we see that in the U.K. doctors are being forced to report to the government their patients’ private information such as drinking habits, waist size, weight, cholesterol, and other data that are none of the government’s damn business. Obviously, this is yet another overreach that will probably be adopted by the U.S. government, and for the purposes of more intrusions, more police S.W.A.T. team raids of innocents.

And it will not end with “waist sizes, weight, and drinking habits,” in the U.K. or in Amerika. With the DHS “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign, and the prospects that the further-dumbed down population combined with ObamaCare/Soviet medicine and the decline in quality of doctors, Dr. Brownshirt will be glad to report your political beliefs to government bureaucrats, especially if you express “anti-government” views.

Yes, it will come to that, especially given how the whole government-controlled education system indoctrinates the youngins to be obedient to government and to view with suspicion those who dare express independent thoughts.

If we really lived in a land of freedom, the doctors would refuse to be doctorcrats, and would most assuredly declare to those government bureaucrats: “No, I will NOT report my patients’ private matters, their weight, their habits, or anything else that is none of your business!”

In a truly free and civilized society, the doctors would protect their patients’ privacy and security from bureaucratic intruders, pure and simple.

From the medical police state to national security nonsense:

I’m hearing on the radio these auditions for the part of Secretary of Defense. All those spineless weasels on both sides, the questioners from the Senate Foreign Belligerence Committee, and the applicant.

So we have the one trying out for the part, Chuck Hagel, totally backing down from defending his earlier statements and positions previous to these auditions, those statements and positions which he was just recently defending. Talk about a gutless wonder.

That means he is perfect for the role! (Perfectly mealy-mouthed, that is.)

And his auditioners, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the rest of them. Are they really, sincerely concerned for Israel and the Israelis? Please. They are concerned for themselves and their own reelections, getting the campaign donations from AIPAC and other lobbying organizations, and maintaining their grasp on power in the senate, and accumulating as much of a government pension for whenever they are finally dragged into retirement.

Oooh, anyone who dares to criticize Israel and the Israeli government is run out of town these days in modern “advanced” America. But I won’t go there. Not here. It’s very upsetting to see how in 21st Century America the most presumably intelligent and open-minded people become the most intolerant when it comes to Israel and any criticisms of it. Even Alan Dershowitz – the supposed defender of the First Amendment – has become part of that crowd of intolerance. But I digress.

Obviously, especially since the end of the Cold War, the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington have not been concerned for the defense of the United States as much as they have been concerned for expanding the size and powers of the U.S. government, and the size and powers of their own fiefdoms, and that’s it.

So, unless this huge population of over 300 million – spanning over 3 million square miles – finally understands the inevitably disastrous results of centralizing government power into the hands of a few, and the impossibility of central planners in Washington to administer any service or function for such a vast territory and a huge population, then yes, the whole system is doomed to finally collapse on its own weight, and chaos will result.

Statism is a sickness, and Americans have some healing to do, that’s for sure.

(See Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Democracy: The God That Failed for more info.)

So, I admit that some of my recent articles have contained some “vitriol” and may have sounded “depressing” or “bitter.” But each day there is one new frightening news item after another, one new “Oy vey” moment. Oh, well.

Do I still hear those crickets?

Don’t Rely on Politics or Politicians

This morning on WRKO Jeffrey Kuhner interviewed the “Lone Republican,” Boston Herald columnist Holly Robichaud, who wrote a column very critical of Scott Brown’s late decision to not run for the U.S. senate seat that was left open by John Kerry. The special election is June 25th.

I normally don’t link to the Boston Herald, because they archive their articles after only a week or so, and you have to pay to see it after that. And I am sure that most readers here are not interested in going through some pay-registration thing just to see some article I have linked. As I have noted in the past, these print dinosaurs still haven’t assimilated to the Internet. I am not going to link to something that won’t be there after only one week, while my post that is linking remains for an indefinite period. In other words, the Herald should want other blogs and websites to link to them, to get more readers to their site, more clicks on their ads, free of charge. But I digress. For this particular Robichaud column, I will make an exception.

Anyway, Ms. Robichaud wrote in her column, among her criticisms of Scott Brown,

… he has disenfranchised far too much of his original base. First to go was the Tea Party. He lost its support during a speech when he denied the party’s contribution to his victory. Brown kicked to the curb the fiscal conservatives when he voted for Dodd-Frank and President Obama’s phony jobs bill. He chipped away at his lunch bucket supporters when he voted for Obama’s fiscal cliff deal that raised payroll taxes. More recently, Brown jilted Second Amendment enthusiasts with his support for an assault weapons ban ….

And Ms. Robichaud in the WRKO interview was again very critical of Scott Brown, who, had he given the state Republicans more advance notice of his decision not to run, they could have had time to get more money and get signatures for ballot petitions. The Republican candidate (if there is one) will oppose either Rep.Ed Malarkey (D-Loonyland) or Rep. Steve Lynch (D-South Boston). The party primaries are on April 30th.

But, like many other misguided souls who naively get involved in politics, Ms. Robichaud has typically put way too much faith in a political hack who has presented himself as just a “regular guy,” who believes in freedom, justice and the American way (or something like that).

In the radio interview, Robichaud expressed her disappointment in Brown, stating that his delayed announcement of non-candidacy has been a “betrayal” to the party. She said, “I have stuck by him…” and “I stood by him,” etc. And in her Herald column, she wrote in the first paragraph, “With less than 23 days to get 10,000 certified signatures for the ballot, the timing of his decision is like leaving a bride at the altar.”

Now, now, now.  If she feels like a bride left at the altar by Scott Brown, perhaps it is time for some introspection and reexamining her understanding of the importance and necessity of politics and politicians.

But you see, as the late Jerry Williams pointed out many times on his radio talk shows, politicians are a different breed of human being.

What attracts most politicians to the world of government and The State is power and control, becoming a part of the apparatus in society that has artificial authority given to it, that has monopolies in security and ultimate judicial decision-making that the entire population is compelled by law and by force to have to use. It gives this certain class of people — the Rulers — the right to be above the law, and the power to have the rest of us schmucks show obedience and submission to them. And that’s it.

Scott Brown is no different from the typical sleazebag pol, like Romney, McCain, Ed Malarkey, John Kerry etc. etc. Brown was a state representative who took advantage of a special state senate election to replace then-Sen. Cheryl Jacques, and then as a state senator, he took advantage of a special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. In other words, Brown is really a political opportunist who likes government power.

My guess is that Brown voted for the Dodd-Frank atrocity because he foresaw Elizabeth Warren (the architect of Dodd-Frank) as the Democrat nominee in the 2012 U.S. senate race, and Brown wanted to say that he supported that legislation as a means of removing a possible issues-related political weapon that Ms. Warren could have used against him in that race. He did not vote for Dodd-Frank out of principle, in my opinion, because no one could have done that, given what a load of crap it is.

But putting faith in these kinds of people in the world of government and politics is really a waste of time, energy and resources. It is better to spend such time and money advocating the dismantling of all these intrusive, immoral and unconstitutional government programs. And if you must support any politicians, only support those who really will dismantle (not “reform”) all these communist socialist bad policies. (Like Ron Paul.)

Regarding the pols themselves, and those who hang out with them and those in the Press who act as their stenographers, and those who place themselves in the category of “elite,” or “intellectuals” (Hah! I’m not describing Scott Brown as an “intellectual,” not by a long shot!), as I wrote in my article Politics or Principle, “Too many people just seem to be attracted to the addictive power of the State, and tend to join in the popular witch hunts against those who advocate a society of actual independence under the Rule of Law.”

And in that article I quoted Hans-Hermann Hoppe from his article on Natural Elites, Intellectuals, and the State. I was mainly using Hoppe’s article to point out that the change from the natural elites and genuine intellectuals to the kinds of power-grabbers, opportunists, parasites and phonies we have now coincided with the increase in size and power of government:

Hans-Hermann Hoppe notes that the “natural elites” of earlier times achieved status and success through their own natural abilities and talents, were characterized by wisdom, bravery and farsightedness, and acted as “judges and peacemakers” out of a genuine sense of duty to others, and often without financial compensation. But their status changed as democracies evolved:

The fortunes of the great families have dissipated through confiscatory taxes, during life and at the time of death. These families’ tradition of economic independence, intellectual farsightedness, and moral and spiritual leadership have been lost and forgotten. Rich men exist today, but more frequently than not they owe their fortunes directly or indirectly to the state. Hence, they are often more dependent on the state’s continued favors than many people of far-lesser wealth. They are typically no longer the heads of long-established leading families, but “nouveaux riches.” Their conduct is not characterized by virtue, wisdom, dignity, or taste, but is a reflection of the same proletarian mass-culture of present-orientation, opportunism, and hedonism that the rich and famous now share with everyone else.

Because of the monopolization of law and justice in modern democracies, Hoppe argues, the role of the “natural elites” was taken over by the State apparatchiks as the expanding power of the State was further encouraged by the intellectuals.

On the other hand, while the natural elites were being destroyed, intellectuals assumed a more prominent and powerful position in society. Indeed, to a large extent they have achieved their goal and have become the ruling class, controlling the state and functioning as monopolistic judge.

This is not to say that democratically elected politicians are all intellectuals (although there are certainly more intellectuals nowadays who become president than there were intellectuals who became king.) After all, it requires somewhat different skills and talents to be an intellectual than it does to have mass-appeal and be a successful fundraiser. But even the non-intellectuals are the products of indoctrination by tax-funded schools, universities, and publicly employed intellectuals, and almost all of their advisors are drawn from this pool.

Irrational America

February 2, 2013

Copyright © 2013 by (Link to article)

My previous article – on our society’s growing fascism – may have had a bit much “vitriolic rhetoric.” But sometimes I am extremely frustrated with the irrationality and cognitive dissonance which pervade America.

There are many examples of such irrationality, from the Sandy Hook story and gun control to the Aaron Swartz persecution to foreign policy. It’s everywhere.

For instance, the government’s stenographers of the news media are mirroring the gun grabbers’ zeal to steal innocent people’s means of self-defense away, based on the emotionalism surrounding the Sandy Hook school shootings.

But only on non-mainstream outlets or alternative websites do we hear about the prescription drugs that many of these recent mass shooters had been taking leading up to their rampage.

Are so many people now so unthinkingly submissive to their government bureaucrats’ disarm-the-public campaign that they refuse to see what really may have caused someone to lose control and shoot innocent people?

Why is no one in the mainstream news media asking whether the Sandy Hook shooter(s) had been taking prescription meds?

I just can’t believe that Big Pharma’s influence on the general population and the media could be that strong. Is it really that bad?

I really believe that we are living in a very real, modern Twilight Zone.

The late Rod Serling would find a wealth of material just in today’s news stories for his scripts.

Unfortunately, tragedies such as Sandy Hook are exploited by those who believe in the two-tier society of armed government police and government military, and a disarmed civilian population.

The more serious irrationality in America is that some of the gun-grabbers’ supporters are in denial of the possibility that their own government could turn against them.

But many Americans may finally begin to question their support of the current government monopoly of armed local policing and “national security” when Obama calls for a martial law in the case of economic collapse and civil unrest.

Now in America, it is beyond just denial and irrationality, but pure gullibility, especially since 9/11. The Bush and Obama administrations have started or continued two illegal and counter-productive wars, and domestically have instituted policies which have blatantly violated the rights of innocent Americans.

But why do so many Americans – in a society as advanced and developed as America supposedly is – so gullibly believe and accept what government bureaucrats tell them, no matter how illogical, impractical, far-fetched or implausible?

The government claims to have the legal and moral authority to arrest and detain indefinitelyeven kill – anyone these government bureaucrats assert is an “enemy combatant” or a “terrorist,” without showing any evidence against the accused, and the people just trust these government officials with such powers!

Really? You trust Obama to have those powers? Barack Obama? (In a Twilight Zone episode, maybe.)

Removing your right to due process and presumption of innocence – only those who are really loony-tunes could approve of this. Unfortunately, America has many of them now.

And many of the well-fed and well-paid apparatchiks of the courts have been rubber-stamping these crimes committed by our governments, federal, state and local.

There are some exceptions, however, such as Judge Katherine Forrest who struck down Obama’s indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. But after the Obama Administration appealed the decision, sure enough a crony three-judge panel – all Obama appointees – came along to reinstate it.

It was really important to Obama to have the power to arrest and indefinitely detain innocent Americans without due process.

And people approve of the current system in which government whistleblowers are persecuted in order to protect the real criminals in power.

The overclassifying of documents is a means of protecting secrecy and an excuse for pursuing the whistleblowers.

And the modern police brotherhood punishes the good cops who defend the victims of the bad cops’ violence.

But many people today are still brainwashed to believe that all police are good and right and if there was a search of someone’s home then it must be because he did something wrong, or if there was a S.W.A.T. team raid in someone’s home then it must be because the residents were criminals.

Radley Balko is featuring a “Raid of the Day” on his blog between now and June, when his book, Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces, will be released. Most of those raids featured were botched or at the wrong house. But some of them went “right” (whatever that means).

Also, Will Grigg’s many articles now on and the website CopBlock detail one story after another of government police criminality.

The government police are the one group in America, in my opinion, who now get away with committing many serious crimes against innocent people.

But despite the rise in the ranks of punks and bullies, and the assaults and murders committed on a daily basis by today’s police, and despite the thousands and thousands of federal, state and local laws and ordinances that cops loyally and unthinkingly enforce, and the abuse of authority by government police, most people nevertheless support them and hold them in high esteem. That, to me, is very irrational.

Yet whenever I mention the idea of de-monopolizing community policing and security away from the government and toward market or voluntary organizations, people think I’m nuts.

But empowering this one group of people – government police – to have the authority of the law and the State, and for themselves to be above the law, and for only them to be armed but not the rest of the community, is irrational. That’s nuts!

The current growing police state is a result of such irrationality.

So it is too bad that so many people don’t understand that the 2nd Amendment was written into the U.S. Constitution to protect individuals’ and a civilian population’s inherent right of defense from the rulers and their armed goons.

The craziness just goes on in America as legislators continue to invent “crimes,” and police and prosecutors waste time and public funds to enforce them.

Our crazy society has bred many zealous prosecutors now such as those persecuting the late Aaron Swartz in order to make “an example” of an innocent man whose actions harmed no one.

The Aaron Swartz prosecutor, by the way, is the same one who was attempting to steal the Motel Caswell from its owner because there had been some drug-related arrests there.

But despite the Judge’s recent ruling in favor of the owner Russell Caswell, the prosecutor has stated that she may appeal the decision. Can you believe this? She wants to “send a message.”

This whole case had to do with the criminal drug war being waged by very stupid or corrupt (or both) people, especially the feds. Yet the hypocrites don’t go after drunks or prescription drug addicts – not that they should. (Oh, but they do go after those cold medicine junkies out there, of course!)

According to WBUR,

The idea to go after the Motel Caswell sprung from the Drug Enforcement Administration, the trial revealed. The DEA has an agent who testified his job is to seek out targets for forfeiture by watching television news and reading newspapers. When he finds a property where drug crimes occur he goes to the Registry of Deeds. Finding the Motel Caswell had no mortgage and was worth almost $1.5 million, the DEA teamed up with the Tewksbury Police, who were offered 80 percent of the taking, the agent testified.

I ask you, is this America, or the Twilight Zone? Just the craziness of that one prosecutor’s office would also be a good script for Rod Serling. A whole season’s worth, in fact.

It is amazing to me how the American people can support this kind of outright criminal activity, and this irrational drug war!

Are Americans just a bunch of unthinking, clueless sheeple who actually believe that the State owns our bodies and should have the power to determine what people may or may not put into their own bodies?

Alas, most Americans do not believe that people have a right to self-ownership, the right to own their own lives and bodies, the right to be the initial owners of their own labor, to establish voluntary contracts with employers or customers and sell their labor as they see fit.

Americans do believe that they have a right to use the armed force of government to covet and take wealth from their neighbors via tax-theft redistribution schemes, unions and labor laws, corporate lobbying, criminal “forfeiture” seizure-theft laws etc.

And Americans do believe in this “exceptionalism” thing, in which we Americans are superior to foreigners and that our government has some divine right to trespass and occupy foreign lands and covet the natural resources of foreigners. But how dare any foreign government attempt to occupy our lands and covet our natural resources!

And despite NATO’s history of criminality, many people actually still view NATO with respect (and the awful UN as well).

And I wonder what Rod Serling would think of the many modern Americans who hold in high esteem the opinions of globalist crackpots like Zbignorant Brzezinski and the Council on Foreign Relations. Yech!

Sorry to sound like I’m down on America or Americans, it’s just the hypocrisy and irrationality that gets me.

But we’re talking about a culture in which a substantial number of people are deeply bothered by someone burning an American flag, yet have no problem with dehumanizing an entire population (such as the Iraqis) to rationalize the slaughter of a million innocents, or have no problem with the aforementioned government police and S.W.A.T. teams getting away with murdering many innocent Americans every day for no good reason.

We now have a police state in which 5-year-old children are being suspended for making harmless toy guns, while other kids in government schools are literally being tortured by the Amerikan Nazis and psychopaths who run these damn schools!

Oh, we’re “exceptional,” all right.

And ours is a society with a Supreme Court Chief Justice who bends over backwards to rubber stamp a clearly unconstitutional and invasive order by Congress and call it a “tax.”

So when Obama completely disarms the population and then declares martial law, I’m sure the Chief Justice will rubber stamp that, too.

And don’t forget the phenomenon of the American texting zombies. They’re out there. Everywhere.

The texting zombies will bow in submission to Herr Obama and obey his orders, no matter what, that’s for sure.

In irrational America, a substantial number of people support the TSA groping and molesting little girls and grandmas, but look the other way while the feds encourage young Muslims to commit jihadi violence just to say “we’ve thwarted terrorism.”

And most Americans will support Congress’s continuing to raise the debt ceiling, raise taxes, increase their selfish spending sprees and kick the can farther down the road to bring America down to total impoverishment and chaos.

I could go on, of course.

So, can you see why I’m frustrated with all this?

(With apologies to the late Rod Serling.)